Posted!

Join the Conversation

This conversation is moderated according to USA TODAY's
community rules.
Please read the rules before joining the discussion.

Series shows folly of border wall plan

Sun-News editorial board
Published 5:03 p.m. MT Sept. 21, 2017

A police officer pulls down a wire ladder early in the morning on May 16, 2017, that had been used the night before by smugglers to help migrants scale the border fence in a park along the border in the center of Mexicali, Mexico, across from Calexico, Calif.(Photo: Nick Oza, The Arizona Republic)

An extensive review of the entire southern border with Mexico conducted by journalists with the USA TODAY Network, including Sun-News reporter Diana Alba-Soular, will examine all aspects of the proposal by President Donald Trump to build a wall the length of our nation’s southern border.

The first story in the series was published Wednesday in the Sun-News and other Gannett newspapers throughout the nation, giving readers a look at both the geography of the entire 2,000-mile border, and the challenges of trying to cover it with a wall. The series contains some terrific reporting, and we are hopeful that it will give those in the rest of the country, living far from the border, a more realistic view of our region.

One thing that is made clear in the series is that claims made during the campaign about how easy it would be to seal off the entire border with a physical wall were wildly optimistic, as recent history shows.

In 2006, Congress passed and President George W. Bush signed the Secure Fence Act, which called for hundreds of miles of new security barriers along the border, but certainly not a wall for its entire length. The lawsuits from that one are still not over.

In order to acquire the property needed for the new fencing, more than 300 condemnation cases were filed by the federal government against landowners in Texas alone. In one of those cases, U.S. taxpayers paid $5 million for a six-acre parcel of land.

Eleven years after passage of the act, 85 cases are still lumbering through the legal process. Some of those who had their land seized by the federal government will never get justice. They died while waiting for their cases to be heard

The land seizures needed then were nothing compared to what is being contemplated now A Texas public records review by the USA TODAY Network identified nearly 5,000 parcels of private land that would have to be seized or disrupted in order to construct a wall from El Paso to Brownsville. One can only imagine how long it would take to unravel that legal mess, or how much it would cost.

The review also shows in detail what those of us who live here already know, how treacherous and remote much of the landscape along the border is. An online component includes an interactive aerial view of the entire southern border, taken by helicopter. There are considerable stretches where just getting the materials into the area to construct a wall would be incredibly time-consuming and expensive.

The review includes a poll of all 535 members of Congress, who were asked if they would support a $1.6 billion down payment for a border wall. Fewer than 25 percent of Republicans said responded yes. Many didn’t respond. New Mexico’s delegation, including Republican Rep. Steve Pearce, all opposed spending for the wall.

Smart border security, using a combination of physical barriers and surveillance technology, could help to secure the border. Is that what the president wants?

Stuart Harris, vice president of the National Border Patrol Council Local 1929, suggested this is a case where Trump should be taken seriously but not literally.

“What actually does he mean by the wall? The wall is a combination of infrastructure, technology and boots on the ground,” Harris said.

If that is, indeed, the case, President Trump should tell us. If, however, he is serious about wanting a real wall the length of the border, this USA TODAY series will provide ample evidence as to why that is a ridiculous idea.